It is generally admitted that causes precede their effects in time. This usually justifies the preference for longitudinal studies over cross-sectional ones, because the former allow the modelling of the dynamic process generating the outcome, while the latter cannot. Supporters of the longitudinal view make two interrelated claims: (i) causal inference requires following the same individuals over time, and (ii) no causal inference can be drawn from cross-sectional data. In this paper, we challenge this view and offer counter-arguments to both claims. We also argue that the possibility of establishing causal relations does not so much depend upon whether we use longitudinal or cross-sectional data, but rather on whether or not the modelling strategy is structural.
Do we necessarily need longitudinal data to infer causal relations?
RUSSO, Federica;
2010
Abstract
It is generally admitted that causes precede their effects in time. This usually justifies the preference for longitudinal studies over cross-sectional ones, because the former allow the modelling of the dynamic process generating the outcome, while the latter cannot. Supporters of the longitudinal view make two interrelated claims: (i) causal inference requires following the same individuals over time, and (ii) no causal inference can be drawn from cross-sectional data. In this paper, we challenge this view and offer counter-arguments to both claims. We also argue that the possibility of establishing causal relations does not so much depend upon whether we use longitudinal or cross-sectional data, but rather on whether or not the modelling strategy is structural.I documenti in SFERA sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.